Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Enhancing Thermal MOT: A Novel Box Association Method Leveraging Thermal Identity and Motion Similarity

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Adding a thermal-histogram similarity term to the box-association step of two-stage trackers improves MOT accuracy on thermal video, with ByteTrack's MOTA rising from 65.5 to 66.4 and OCSORT's from 54.4 to 56.4 on the authors' validation…

desk verdict Worth knowing for the new RGB-thermal MOT dataset; the tracking improvement claim is not established because alpha is tuned on the same six sequences used for evaluation. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12943 v1 pith:WGBS4454 submitted 2024-11-20 cs.CV cs.AIcs.LG

Wassim El Ahmar , Dhanvin Kolhatkar , Farzan Nowruzi , Robert Laganiere This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.LG
keywords multi-objecttrackingthermalimagingboxassociationBhattacharyyacoefficientidentityRGB-thermaldatasetpedestriantwo-stagetracker
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper claims that the box-association step of two-stage multi-object trackers can be improved in thermal video by adding a thermal-identity term: the pixel-intensity histogram of each detected box, compared between tracklets and detections via the Bhattacharyya coefficient. The authors fuse this thermal similarity with the usual motion-based similarity as $S_{\mathrm{comp}} = \alpha S_{\mathrm{motion}} + (1-\alpha) S_{\mathrm{thermal}}$, and show on their six validation sequences that ByteTrack's MOTA rises from 65.5 to 66.4 with IDF1 from 62.6 to 63.8, while OCSORT's MOTA rises from 54.4 to 56.4 with IDF1 from 57.8 to 58.6. The method is plug-in in spirit: it changes only the association cost, not the detector or the tracker's internal motion model. The paper also contributes a new paired RGB-thermal pedestrian MOT dataset of 30 sequences, which it uses to fine-tune detectors and benchmark standard trackers with and without the proposed association.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the thermal similarity matrix $S_{\mathrm{thermal}}$, where each entry is the Bhattacharyya coefficient between the normalized intensity histograms of the bounding-box regions of a tracked box and a candidate detection in the current thermal image. The Bhattacharyya coefficient is a standard histogram-overlap measure ranging from 0 (no overlap) to 1 (identical); here it serves as a 'thermal identity' score. The mechanism is completed by the convex combination $S_{\mathrm{comp}} = \alpha S_{\mathrm{motion}} + (1-\alpha) S_{\mathrm{thermal}}$, which is fed into the tracker's association step in place of the pure motion cost. The weight $\alpha$ is tuned on validation sequences and differs by tracker (0.3 for ByteTrack, 0.8 for OCSORT), reflecting how much each tracker's motion model is trusted. This combination is what carries the reported improvement.

What would settle it

Measure the same person's thermal histogram across consecutive frames and at different distances in the new dataset: if the within-person variation over the tracking interval approaches the between-person variation, then the Bhattacharyya term cannot be separating identities, and any MOTA/IDF1 gain would have to come from a different mechanism, such as a smoothing of the association cost.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that thermal images carry a sparse but stable per-object identity signal — the distribution of pixel intensities within a detection window — that existing two-stage trackers discard at the association step. The paper formalizes this as a thermal similarity matrix $S_{\mathrm{thermal}}$ whose entry $(i,j)$ is the Bhattacharyya coefficient between the normalized histograms of tracklet $i$ and detection $j$ extracted from the thermal frame. Combining this with the tracker's motion similarity matrix as $S_{\mathrm{comp}} = \alpha S_{\mathrm{motion}} + (1-\alpha) S_{\mathrm{thermal}}$ improves tracking on the validation sequences for both ByteTrack and OCSORT, with optimal $\alpha = 0.3$ for ByteTrack and $\alpha = 0.8$ for OCSORT. The paper further observes that a purely thermal association ($\alpha = 0$) already gives ByteTrack 63.4 MOTA and 55.1 IDF1, which it reads as evidence that thermal identity alone is a substantial association cue in these urban pedestrian scenes.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that a pedestrian's thermal histogram, extracted from the detected bounding box, is stable enough from frame to frame and discriminative enough between different people that the Bhattacharyya coefficient is a reliable identity cue; if pose, distance, or background radiation makes the histogram unstable, the added term could inject noise rather than signal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Because the change is confined to the association cost, any two-stage tracker in the thermal spectrum could adopt the method without retraining its detector or motion model.
  • The tracker-specific optimal $\alpha$ implies that trackers with weaker or noisier motion prediction benefit more from thermal identity; tuning this weight becomes a per-tracker hyperparameter.
  • The $\alpha=0$ result for ByteTrack shows that thermal histogram matching alone, without motion, is already competitive, suggesting that a purely appearance-based association is viable in thermal pedestrian scenes.
  • The new RGB-thermal MOT dataset of 30 paired sequences gives the community a benchmark for developing and comparing thermal and RGB trackers beyond the two models tested here.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the thermal histogram is stable over longer intervals, the same identity term could be used for re-identification after occlusion, a case the paper does not test; the reported gains come from near-term association, so extending the term to a tracklet-recovery stage is a natural next experiment.
  • The fact that a raw intensity histogram helps suggests that learned thermal embeddings, trained on the new dataset, might extract a stronger identity signal; the paper's mechanism provides a baseline that such embeddings would need to beat.
  • The paired RGB-thermal sequences invite a cross-modal test: whether an RGB-trained re-identification model, or a shared embedding, can improve thermal association when the thermal histogram alone is ambiguous (e.g., similarly heated pedestrians).
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper proposes a box-association method for two-stage multi-object trackers operating on thermal video. For each track-detection pair, the method computes a normalized histogram of the thermal ROI for each box, measures their similarity with the Bhattacharyya coefficient, and combines this with the standard motion similarity as S_comp = alpha * S_motion + (1 - alpha) * S_thermal (Eq. 3). The alpha weighting is selected per tracker on six validation sequences. The paper also introduces an RGB-Thermal MOT dataset of 30 synchronized RGB/thermal sequences collected at urban intersections, with a 24/6 train/test split, and benchmarks ByteTrack and OC-SORT with and without the proposed association term. The reported results show small aggregate gains on the six validation sequences: ByteTrack MOTA 65.5->66.4 and IDF1 62.6->63.8; OC-SORT MOTA 54.4->56.4 and IDF1 57.8->58.6.

Significance. The dataset release and the idea of exploiting thermal identity in the association step are potentially useful contributions to thermal MOT, which has few public benchmarks. The authors also provide source code and a benchmark of two standard trackers on RGB and thermal data, which is a service to the community. However, the central empirical claim that adding the thermal-histogram term improves tracking accuracy is not established by the current evaluation: alpha is tuned on the same six sequences on which the final metrics are reported, the gains are small and inconsistent per sequence, and there is no significance testing or external benchmark. If the method holds up on a properly held-out test set, the contribution would be modest but sound; with the current protocol it reads as a tuned outcome rather than a validated prediction.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sections 5.2 and 5.3] The weighting factor alpha is selected by grid search on the six validation sequences (Section 5.2, Figure 2), and the final MOTA/IDF1 values are then reported on exactly those same six sequences (Tables 3 and 4). This makes the reported improvements a tuned result rather than an unbiased estimate. The text in Section 5.2 says alpha is 'proven' to be 0.3/0.8, but the figures only show that these values maximize metrics on the evaluation set. The central claim requires a held-out test set or nested cross-validation; otherwise the comparison is circular.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eq. (3)] The method assumes that a pedestrian's thermal ROI histogram is stable across frames and discriminative between different people, so that the Bhattacharyya coefficient is a reliable identity cue. This assumption is load-bearing but is not tested. The paper provides no measurement of intra-identity histogram stability, inter-identity separability, or sensitivity to pose/distance/background radiation. Without such an analysis or an ablation that isolates the thermal term's contribution, it is unclear whether the small aggregate gains come from genuine identity information or from fitting alpha to noise.
  3. [Tables 3 and 4] The per-sequence results are inconsistent with the aggregate claim. For example, in Table 4 sequence 2, IDF1 drops from 51.7% to 42.4% with the proposed method, and in sequence 54 the MOTA gain is only 40.1% to 42.4%. These swings are comparable in magnitude to the reported aggregate improvements and no significance testing is provided. The claim of 'significant improvements' in the abstract and Section 5.3 is therefore not supported. Paired per-sequence statistics and ideally evaluation on an external thermal MOT benchmark are needed.
  4. [Section 5.4] The limitations section lists only equipment and urban-scene constraints and does not acknowledge that alpha selection and the final evaluation share the same six sequences. Given that this is the main threat to the paper's empirical claim, the limitation should be stated explicitly, along with the absence of a held-out test set.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 4.2] The notation is confusing: Eq. (3) uses S_comp and calls it a similarity matrix, but later text refers to a 'comprehensive distance matrix.' Since IoU and the Bhattacharyya coefficient are both similarity measures, the paper should clarify whether the combination is maximized or converted to a cost, and how the sign/direction is handled in the Hungarian matching.
  2. [Section 4.2] The histogram bin size and range used to compute H_ti and H_dj are not specified, and the normalization procedure is described only vaguely. These are free parameters that affect the result and should be reported for reproducibility.
  3. [Tables 1-4] There are formatting and naming inconsistencies: 'V al' and 'T able' appear in table headers, 'Bytetrack' and 'ByteTrack' are used interchangeably, and 'OCSort' appears alongside 'OCSORT'. These should be unified.
  4. [Figure 2] The axes and legend of Figure 2 are not described in the caption, so the reader cannot verify which curve corresponds to MOTA versus IDF1 or how alpha values were sampled. Please label the axes and include the alpha values on the x-axis.
  5. [Section 1.2] The claim that the dataset is 'comparable in size' to MOT17 is not substantiated; the paper should state MOT17's frame/annotation counts alongside the numbers in Table 1 for a direct comparison.
  6. [Section 3] The statement that this is the 'world's first large-scale dataset' of RGB and thermal images annotated for MOT should be qualified with respect to the authors' earlier City-Scene dataset (reference [14]) and any other recent thermal MOT datasets, explaining the concrete novelty of the new collection.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The single weighting parameter α is selected by maximizing MOTA/IDF1 on the same six validation sequences whose metrics are then reported as the method's improvement; the headline gains are tuned outcomes, not independent predictions.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 4.2, Eq. (3); Section 5.2 (alpha selection); Section 5.3 and Tables 3-4]
    "Here, α represents a carefully selected weighting factor that balances the contributions of motion and thermal similarities, optimized through experimental validation to ensure effective tracking performance. ... For ByteTrack, the optimal value of α is proven to be 0.3, and that for OCSort is proven to be 0.8 (Figure 2). ... In order to accurately find the best alpha-value ... we calculate the MOTA and IDF1 generated through our approach on the validation sequences of the RGB-Thermal MOT dataset. ..."

    The only free parameter α in Scomp = α·Smotion + (1-α)·Sthermal is chosen by sweeping MOTA and IDF1 over the six validation sequences (Figure 2), and the same six sequences are then used in Tables 3-4 to report the claimed improvements (ByteTrack MOTA 65.5 to 66.4; OCSORT MOTA 54.4 to 56.4). The overall values reported are the maxima read off the alpha sweep on the same data, so the 'prediction' is the selection objective evaluated on the fitting set, not a held-out confirmation. Per-sequence results are noisy and sometimes worse (Table 4, sequence 2 IDF1 drops from 51.7 to 42.4), and Section 5.4 does not acknowledge the absence of a held-out test set. Thus the central empirical claim reduces to a tuned outcome rather than an independent validation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that adding the thermal-histogram term of Eq. (3) to ByteTrack and OCSORT improves thermal MOT. The method itself is a heuristic fusion of motion and thermal Bhattacharyya similarity; there is no derivation chain to inspect beyond Eq. (3). The circularity lies in the evaluation: α is selected on the six validation sequences by maximizing the very metrics (MOTA, IDF1) that Tables 3-4 then report as evidence of improvement. Because the same data are used for parameter selection and final reporting, the gains are statistically forced rather than predicted. No external benchmark is used, and the limitation section only mentions equipment and urban-scene constraints, not the evaluation-set reuse. The dataset contribution and code release are independent of this circularity, and the self-citations to the authors' prior dataset work are not load-bearing for the method's claimed improvement. Overall, the empirical validation is partially circular because the reported improvement is a fitted outcome; score 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central algorithm adds one tuned hyperparameter (alpha) and relies on two domain assumptions about thermal signature stability, plus an unstated comparability of the motion and thermal similarity scales. The evaluation set is the same set used to tune alpha, so the reported gains are partially fitted outcomes rather than independent predictions.

free parameters (4)
  • alpha (fusion weight) = 0.3 for ByteTrack, 0.8 for OCSORT
    Selected in Section 5.2 by sweeping alpha on the validation sequences and choosing the best MOTA/IDF1 trade-off; final results are reported on those same sequences, so the gains are partly tuned rather than predicted.
  • histogram bin count and range = not reported
    Section 4.2 says 'appropriate bin sizes and ranges' are used but does not state them; the choice changes the Bhattacharyya similarity values and thus the association cost.
  • ByteTrack and OCSORT hyperparameters = not reported
    Hyperparameters of both trackers were optimized for MOTA/IDF1 (Section 4.1) but the optimized values are not listed, which affects the comparison.
  • TOOD detector fine-tuning schedule = not reported
    Fine-tuning on the new dataset is described only at a high level; learning rate, epochs, and augmentation are not reported, so detector quality is not reproducible from the text.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption A Bhattacharyya coefficient between normalized thermal histograms is a valid proxy for thermal object identity in box association.
    Invoked in Section 4.2 and Algorithm 1; no analysis of intra-object versus inter-object histogram variation is provided.
  • domain assumption A pedestrian's thermal histogram remains stable across consecutive frames at 5 fps in outdoor urban scenes.
    Core premise of using Sthermal; not measured in the experiments.
  • ad hoc to paper The motion similarity matrix and thermal similarity matrix are on comparable scales, so a scalar-weighted sum is a valid association cost.
    Equation (3) combines them with a single alpha; no normalization of the two matrices is described.
  • ad hoc to paper Performance on the six validation sequences, after selecting alpha on them, is representative of performance on unseen thermal MOT data.
    Section 5.2 selects alpha on the validation split and Section 5.3 reports final metrics on the same split.
  • standard math Bhattacharyya coefficient is a standard histogram similarity measure in [0,1].
    Used without proof in Section 4.2; accepted background from the tracking literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhancing Thermal MOT: A Novel Box Association Method Leveraging Thermal Identity and Motion Similarity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WGBS4454

@misc{pith2026241112943,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhancing Thermal MOT: A Novel Box Association Method Leveraging Thermal Identity and Motion Similarity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WGBS4454}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12943}
}
read the original abstract

Multiple Object Tracking (MOT) in thermal imaging presents unique challenges due to the lack of visual features and the complexity of motion patterns. This paper introduces an innovative approach to improve MOT in the thermal domain by developing a novel box association method that utilizes both thermal object identity and motion similarity. Our method merges thermal feature sparsity and dynamic object tracking, enabling more accurate and robust MOT performance. Additionally, we present a new dataset comprised of a large-scale collection of thermal and RGB images captured in diverse urban environments, serving as both a benchmark for our method and a new resource for thermal imaging. We conduct extensive experiments to demonstrate the superiority of our approach over existing methods, showing significant improvements in tracking accuracy and robustness under various conditions. Our findings suggest that incorporating thermal identity with motion data enhances MOT performance. The newly collected dataset and source code is available at https://github.com/wassimea/thermalMOT

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12943 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Sample RGB and corresponding thermal images from the RGB-Thermal MOT dataset. 4 Experiments Our study focuses specifically on the enhancement of the box association step for Multiple Object Tracking (MOT) in thermal imagery. We leverage the ca￾pabilities of the two most advanced two-stage trackers, (ByteTrack [51] and OCSORT [6]), as the basis for our experiments. This focused approach allows us [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:fi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: MOTA and IDF1 values of our proposed box association method used with ByteTrack. Right: MOTA and IDF1 values used with OCSORT on the validation sequences of the RGB-Thermal MOT dataset using different values of alpha [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overall comparison of the important MOT metrics running standard motion box association against our proposed box association algorithm using ByteTrack [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Overall comparison of the important MOT metrics running standard motion box association against our proposed box association algorithm using OCSort [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. IMM-MOT: A Novel 3D Multi-object Tracking Framework with Interacting Multiple Model Filter

    cs.CV 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A Tracking-by-Detection 3D MOT system using an Interacting Multiple Model filter, damping-window trajectory scoring, and distance-based score reweighting reports 73.8% AMOTA on nuScenes Val, 0.1% above Fast-Poly.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    In:2023 IEEE/CVFConference onComputer Vision andPatternRecognition Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 15 Workshops (CVPRW)

    Ahmar, W.E., Massoud, Y., Kolhatkar, D., AlGhamdi, H., Alja’Afreh, M., La- ganiere, R., Hammoud, R.: Enhanced thermal-RGB fusion for robust object detec- tion. In:2023 IEEE/CVFConference onComputer Vision andPatternRecognition Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 15 Workshops (CVPRW). IEEE (jun 2023).https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPRW59228. 2023.00042

    work page arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP)

    Bewley, A., Ge, Z., Ott, L., Ramos, F., Upcroft, B.: Simple online and realtime tracking. In: 2016 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP). IEEE (sep 2016).https://doi.org/10.1109/icip.2016.7533003

    arXiv 2016

  3. [3]

    IEEE Access11, 82410–82442 (2023)

    Brenner, M., Reyes, N.H., Susnjak, T., Barczak, A.L.C.: RGB-d and thermal sen- sor fusion: A systematic literature review. IEEE Access11, 82410–82442 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2023.3301119

    work page arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    In: 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)

    Broyles, D., Hayner, C.R., Leung, K.: WiSARD: A labeled visual and thermal image dataset for wilderness search and rescue. In: 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE (oct 2022).https: //doi.org/10.1109/iros47612.2022.9981298

    arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Cai, Z., Vasconcelos, N.: Cascade r-cnn: Delving into high quality object detection. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE (jun 2017).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2018.00644

    arXiv 2018

  6. [7]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07155 (2019)

    Chen, K., Wang, J., Pang, J., Cao, Y., Xiong, Y., Li, X., Sun, S., Feng, W., Liu, Z., Xu, J., Zhang, Z., Cheng, D., Zhu, C., Cheng, T., Zhao, Q., Li, B., Lu, X., Zhu, R., Wu, Y., Dai, J., Wang, J., Shi, J., Ouyang, W., Loy, C.C., Lin, D.: MMDetection: Open mmlab detection toolbox and benchmark. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.07155 (2019)

    arXiv 2019

  7. [8]

    https://github.com/open-mmlab/mmtracking (2020)

    Contributors, M.: MMTracking: OpenMMLab video perception toolbox and bench- mark. https://github.com/open-mmlab/mmtracking (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [9]

    Applied Intelligence51(3), 1244–1261 (sep 2020).https: //doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-01882-2

    Dai, X., Yuan, X., Wei, X.: TIRNet: Object detection in thermal infrared images for autonomous driving. Applied Intelligence51(3), 1244–1261 (sep 2020).https: //doi.org/10.1007/s10489-020-01882-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s10489-020-01882-2 2020

Show all 51 references
  1. [10]

    In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, pp

    Dave, A., Khurana, T., Tokmakov, P., Schmid, C., Ramanan, D.: TAO: A large- scale benchmark for tracking any object. In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, pp. 436–454. Springer International Publishing (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-3-030-58558-7_26

    2020

  2. [11]

    Dendorfer, P., Rezatofighi, H., Milan, A., Shi, J., Cremers, D., Reid, I., Roth, S., Schindler, K., Leal-Taixe, L.: Cvpr19 tracking and detection challenge: How crowded can it get? (2019).https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1906.04567

    2019 doi arXiv

  3. [12]

    Dendorfer, P., Rezatofighi, H., Milan, A., Shi, J., Cremers, D., Reid, I., Roth, S., Schindler, K., Leal-Taixé, L.: Mot20: A benchmark for multi object tracking in crowded scenes (2020).https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2003.09003

    2020 doi arXiv

  4. [13]

    In: 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Duan, K., Bai, S., Xie, L., Qi, H., Huang, Q., Tian, Q.: Centernet: Keypoint triplets for object detection. In: 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE (oct 2019).https://doi.org/10.1109/iccv.2019.00667

    2019

  5. [14]

    El Ahmar, W.A., Kolhatkar, D., Nowruzi, F.E., AlGhamdi, H., Hou, J., Laganiere, R.:Multipleobjectdetectionandtrackinginthethermalspectrum.In:Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 277–285 (2022)

    2022

  6. [15]

    In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Feichtenhofer, C., Pinz, A., Zisserman, A.: Detect to track and track to detect. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE (oct 2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/iccv.2017.330 16 W. El Ahmar et al

    2017 doi

  7. [16]

    In: 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Feng, C., Zhong, Y., Gao, Y., Scott, M.R., Huang, W.: Tood: Task-aligned one- stage object detection. In: 2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). pp. 3490–3499. IEEE Computer Society (2021)

    2021

  8. [17]

    In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Girshick, R.: Fast r-cnn. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE (dec 2015).https://doi.org/10.1109/iccv.2015.169

    2015 doi

  9. [18]

    In: 2014 IEEE Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

    Girshick, R., Donahue, J., Darrell, T., Malik, J.: Rich feature hierarchies for accurate object detection and semantic segmentation. In: 2014 IEEE Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE (Nov 2014). https: //doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2014.81

    2014 doi

  10. [19]

    In: 2017 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    He, K., Gkioxari, G., Dollár, P., Girshick, R.: Mask r-CNN. In: 2017 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE (oct 2017). https: //doi.org/10.1109/iccv.2017.322

    2017 doi

  11. [20]

    2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (Dec 2015)

    He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., Sun, J.: Deep residual learning for image recognition. 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (Dec 2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2016.90

    2016 doi

  12. [21]

    He,K.,Zhang,X.,Ren,S.,Sun,J.:Deepresiduallearningforimagerecognition.In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. pp. 770–778 (2016)

    2016

  13. [22]

    Journal of Basic Engineering 82(1), 35–45 (mar 1960)

    Kalman, R.E.: A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. Journal of Basic Engineering 82(1), 35–45 (mar 1960). https://doi.org/10.1115/1. 3662552

    1960 doi

  14. [23]

    IEEE Access8, 125459–125476 (2020).https://doi.org/ 10.1109/access.2020.3007481

    Kristo, M., Ivasic-Kos, M., Pobar, M.: Thermal object detection in difficult weather conditions using YOLO. IEEE Access8, 125459–125476 (2020).https://doi.org/ 10.1109/access.2020.3007481

    2020

  15. [24]

    In: 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)

    Kutuk, Z., Algan, G.: Semantic segmentation for thermal images: A compara- tive survey. In: 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW). IEEE (jun 2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/ cvprw56347.2022.00043

    2022

  16. [25]

    Multimedia Tools and Appli- cations 78(12), 15861–15885 (dec 2018).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018- 6974-5

    Lahmyed, R., Ansari, M.E., Ellahyani, A.: A new thermal infrared and visible spectrum images-based pedestrian detection system. Multimedia Tools and Appli- cations 78(12), 15861–15885 (dec 2018).https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018- 6974-5

    2018 doi

  17. [26]

    In: Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Com- puter Graphics Theory and Applications

    Lahouli, I., Haelterman, R., Chtourou, Z., Cubber, G.D., Attia, R.: Pedestrian de- tection and tracking in thermal images from aerial MPEG videos. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Com- puter Graphics Theory and Applicat...

    2018 doi

  18. [27]

    International Journal of Computer Vision 128(3), 642–656 (aug 2018)

    Law, H., Deng, J.: CornerNet: Detecting objects as paired keypoints. International Journal of Computer Vision 128(3), 642–656 (aug 2018). https://doi.org/10. 1007/s11263-019-01204-1

    2018

  19. [28]

    https://doi.org/10

    Leal-Taixé, L., Milan, A., Reid, I., Roth, S., Schindler, K.: Motchallenge 2015: Towards a benchmark for multi-target tracking (2015). https://doi.org/10. 48550/ARXIV.1504.01942

    2015 doi arXiv

  20. [29]

    Sensors 15(5), 10580–10615 (may 2015).https://doi.org/10.3390/s150510580

    Lee, J., Choi, J.S., Jeon, E., Kim, Y., Le, T., Shin, K., Lee, H., Park, K.: Robust pedestrian detection by combining visible and thermal infrared cameras. Sensors 15(5), 10580–10615 (may 2015).https://doi.org/10.3390/s150510580

    2015 doi

  21. [30]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 31, 392–404 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/tip.2021.3130533 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 17

    Li, C., Xue, W., Jia, Y., Qu, Z., Luo, B., Tang, J., Sun, D.: LasHeR: A large- scale high-diversity benchmark for RGBT tracking. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 31, 392–404 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/tip.2021.3130533 Title Suppressed Due to Excessive Length 17

    2022

  22. [31]

    In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)

    Lin, T.Y., Goyal, P., Girshick, R., He, K., Dollár, P.: Focal loss for dense object detection. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE (oct 2017).https://doi.org/10.1109/iccv.2017.324

    2017 doi

  23. [32]

    IEEE Transactions on Multimedia22(3), 666–675 (mar 2020).https: //doi.org/10.1109/tmm.2019.2932615

    Liu,Q.,He,Z.,Li,X.,Zheng,Y.:PTB-TIR:Athermalinfraredpedestriantracking benchmark. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia22(3), 666–675 (mar 2020).https: //doi.org/10.1109/tmm.2019.2932615

    2020

  24. [33]

    In: Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia

    Liu, Q., Li, X., He, Z., Li, C., Li, J., Zhou, Z., Yuan, D., Li, J., Yang, K., Fan, N., Zheng, F.: LSOTB-TIR: A large-scale high-diversity thermal infrared object tracking benchmark. In: Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM (oct 2020).https:/...

    2020

  25. [34]

    Computer Vision – ECCV 2016 pp

    Liu, W., Anguelov, D., Erhan, D., Szegedy, C., Reed, S., Fu, C.Y., Berg, A.C.: SSD: Single shot MultiBox detector. Computer Vision – ECCV 2016 pp. 21–37 (Dec 2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46448-0_2

    2016 doi

  26. [35]

    2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition (CVPR) (Jan 2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr52688.2022.01167

    Liu, Z., Mao, H., Wu, C.Y., Feichtenhofer, C., Darrell, T., Xie, S.: A ConvNet for the 2020s. 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recog- nition (CVPR) (Jan 2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr52688.2022.01167

    2022

  27. [37]

    Milan, A., Leal-Taixe, L., Reid, I., Roth, S., Schindler, K.: Mot16: A benchmark for multi-object tracking (2016).https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.1603.00831

    2016 doi arXiv

  28. [38]

    In: 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)

    Nowruzi, F.E., Ahmar, W.A.E., Laganiere, R., Ghods, A.H.: In-vehicle occupancy detection with convolutional networks on thermal images. In: 2019 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW). IEEE (jun 2019).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvprw.2019.00124

    2019

  29. [39]

    In: 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Pedersen, M., Haurum, J.B., Bengtson, S.H., Moeslund, T.B.: 3d-ZeF: A 3d ze- brafish tracking benchmark dataset. In: 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE (jun 2020).https://doi.org/10. 1109/cvpr42600.2020.00250

    2020

  30. [40]

    In: 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Redmon,J.,Divvala,S.,Girshick,R.,Farhadi,A.:Youonlylookonce:Unified,real- time object detection. In: 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE (jun 2015).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2016.91

    2016 doi

  31. [41]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 39(6), 1137–1149 (Jun 2015)

    Ren, S., He, K., Girshick, R., Sun, J.: Faster r-cnn: Towards real-time object detec- tion with region proposal networks. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 39(6), 1137–1149 (Jun 2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/ tpami.2016.2577031

    2015

  32. [42]

    In: 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)

    Rivadeneira, R.E., Sappa, A.D., Vintimilla, B.X., Wang, C., Jiang, J., Liu, X., Zhong, Z., Bin, D., Ruodi, L., Shengye, L.: Thermal image super-resolution chal- lenge results - PBVS 2023. In: 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vi- sion and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPR...

    2023

  33. [43]

    IEEE (jun 2023).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.00107

    Shin,U.,Park,J.,Kweon, I.S.:Deepdepthestimationfromthermal image.In:2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE (jun 2023).https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.00107

    2023

  34. [44]

    Sun, P., Cao, J., Jiang, Y., Zhang, R., Xie, E., Yuan, Z., Wang, C., Luo, P.: Transtrack: Multiple object tracking with transformer (2020).https://doi.org/ 10.48550/ARXIV.2012.15460

    2020 doi arXiv

  35. [45]

    International Conference on Machine Learning, 2019 (May 2019) 18 W

    Tan, M., Le, Q.V.: Efficientnet: Rethinking model scaling for convolutional neural networks. International Conference on Machine Learning, 2019 (May 2019) 18 W. El Ahmar et al

    2019

  36. [46]

    In: 2019 IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Voigtlaender, P., Krause, M., Osep, A., Luiten, J., Sekar, B.B.G., Geiger, A., Leibe, B.: MOTS: Multi-object tracking and segmentation. In: 2019 IEEE/CVF Confer- ence on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE (jun 2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.2019.00813

    2019

  37. [47]

    2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (jun 2021)

    Wang, C.Y., Bochkovskiy, A., Liao, H.Y.M.: Scaled-YOLOv4: Scaling cross stage partial network. 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (jun 2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr46437.2021. 01283

    2021

  38. [48]

    In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, pp

    Wang, Z., Zheng, L., Liu, Y., Li, Y., Wang, S.: Towards real-time multi-object tracking. In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, pp. 107–122. Springer International Publishing (Sep 2019).https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58621-8_7

    2020 doi

  39. [49]

    In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP)

    Wojke, N., Bewley, A., Paulus, D.: Simple online and realtime tracking with a deep association metric. In: 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP). IEEE (Mar 2017).https://doi.org/10.1109/icip.2017.8296962

    2017

  40. [50]

    In: 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

    Xie, S., Girshick, R., Dollár, P., Tu, Z., He, K.: Aggregated residual transforma- tions for deep neural networks. In: 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE (Nov 2016).https://doi.org/10.1109/ CVPR.2017.634

    2017

  41. [51]

    In: Computer Vision–ECCV 2022: 17th European Conference, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 23–27, 2022, Proceedings, Part XXII

    Zhang, Y., Sun, P., Jiang, Y., Yu, D., Weng, F., Yuan, Z., Luo, P., Liu, W., Wang, X.: Bytetrack: Multi-object tracking by associating every detection box. In: Computer Vision–ECCV 2022: 17th European Conference, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 23–27, 2022, Proceedings, Part XXII. p...

    2022

  42. [52]

    International Journal of Computer Vision129(11), 3069–3087 (Apr 2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11263-021-01513-4

    Zhang, Y., Wang, C., Wang, X., Zeng, W., Liu, W.: FairMOT: On the fairness of detection and re-identification in multiple object tracking. International Journal of Computer Vision129(11), 3069–3087 (Apr 2020).https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11263-021-01513-4

    2020

  43. [53]

    In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, pp

    Zhou, X., Koltun, V., Krähenbühl, P.: Tracking objects as points. In: Computer Vision – ECCV 2020, pp. 474–490. Springer International Publishing (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58548-8_28

    2020 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.